Dispatches from the 10th Crusade

What’s Wrong with the World
is dedicated to the defense of
what remains of Christendom, the civilization made by the men of
the Cross of Christ. Athwart two hostile Powers we stand: the
Jihad and Liberalism...read more

A Couple of Culture War Notes

By way of follow-up to this post about the Tenneses, the farmers banned from the East Lansing farmers market, we have a momentary bit of good news. A federal judge has enjoined the city of East Lansing for the moment, requiring them to allow the farm to sell in the farmer's market. Of course, they've already lost several months of profit in that market, but it's better than nothing. This is just a temporary injunction for relief, based on the judge's perception that their federal case has enough merit on a couple of its points that it has some probability of succeeding at trial. That might, of course, not happen, or a sensible decision at trial might be overturned on appeal.

The federal judge was apparently somewhat impressed by the argument that the city retaliated against Mr. Tennes for engaging in 1st amendment- protected speech--an interesting argument, and one that I wish could be applied more widely. Apparently the mayor of East Lansing left an incriminating e-mail around in which he implied that the Tenneses should be punished even if they stopped holding weddings at their farm altogether (which they temporarily did) simply for comments about marriage on their Facebook page. Anyway, this story isn't over, but it's a nice reprieve.

Back on the negative side of the cultural news cycle, increasing numbers of public libraries are including a despicable children's book about Gay Pride parades in the sections of their libraries that young children browse unattended. The Illinois Family Institute reports here and here. The drawings in the book, though they are so cartoonish that the eyes of innocence will probably not understand them, are meant to portray some of the perverted sights people see at Gay Pride parades and are meant to romanticize such parades for children. (Let's remember that the Canadian Broadcasting Company says it's healthy for kids to see exposed adult genitalia at Pride parades.)

After their 3-year-old pulled the book off the shelf and asked her mom about it, Kurt Jaros and his wife Michaela stuck their necks out in West Chicago and tried to get their local library at least to move the book to a restricted section, but even that was too much for the hyper-liberals at the library. And for those who showed up in force to show support for...a book glorifying Gay Pride parades for little kids. So for the time being the book, no doubt coming to a library near you, remains in the children's section. Kurt has a brief flyer about the book here.

Kurt, by the way, runs Defenders Media, which is doing a great job in the apologetics realm. Defenders just ran a wonderful conference here in my town on September 8-9. We hope to do another conference like this next year. I got to meet Kurt at that conference (at the time having no clue about what else he'd been doing in Chicago), which was great fun. He also interviewed me by Skype just this past Saturday about undesigned coincidences on the Defenders podcast, Veracity Hill. Defenders is fund-raising right now, and you can consider donating to them and/or following their activities, podcasts, conferences, etc.

Comments (8)

"Let's remember that the Canadian Broadcasting Company says it's healthy for kids to see exposed adult genitalia at Pride parades."

At least they're not advocating that children also go around naked (yet, anyway) like in "Brave New World" (I thought that books was supposed to be a warning, not a how-to guide!). But doesn't bode well when the moral baseline of your parade is fine with exposing children to nudity.

What really shocks me about that particular story is that it wasn't some random blog commentator or Twitterer with a weird Internet handle posting a one-off line about how healthy it is for your kids to see adults flaunting their sexual organs in a sexually themed parade. It was the official state-funded broadcasting company of Canada publishing this opinion, and going on about it at some length. It's a sobering thought, really.

OK, so almost every state has a law against public displays of genitalia. So, while it is illegal to DO it, it isn't a problem to have a book on it for use by kids in the library? Indeed, that's considered good?

If a man shows off his genitalia to a woman in any public or private setting where she did not invite it, that will certainly be cited as a crime, and might comprise several crimes, including various ones relating sexual harassment and thought - hate crimes. And if a priest shows his genitalia to a little boy when they are alone, that's a horrid crime for which no fitting punishment has ever been devised by the mind of man. But if the same man does the same thing in a "Shame" event (let's start calling these what they are, OK?), that changes it so that now what he is doing is healthy and to be praised?

Just how stupid is America now?

Even the Librarians Guild (or whatever they call themselves) isn't actually requiring this kind of idiocy just yet. Any librarian who gives in to this form of crass illogic is TRYING to make things worse, they are not some mere "functionary" just "doing their job".

So how long until we hear about a public school field trip to a gay pride parade? Assuming that has happened yet.

When it does, I won't expect there to be any notice or opt outs. Not for what will no doubt be called vital and healthy education. (I'm half kidding, I assume there is at least some requirement to notify parents about field trips).g

Whoa. I just discovered something kind of interesting about that Canadian Broadcasting page. It was changed. The most jaw-dropping sentence is not found on the link now, so it makes it look like LifeSite News misquoted or invented. The sentence in question says (fill in the blanks), "Your kids will probably see b___bs and p____s." But if you look at the current version of the article, that sentence is gone. See here:

Maybe that degree of exposure is still illegal in Canada and someone pointed this out to cbc.ca.

The reference to seeing "bodies...in all states of undress" is still there, however.

I shd. be clear that in the pics I saw from the library book, I didn't see any actual full nudity. But the author expressly states:

When I wrote this story, I wanted Pride to be featured as realistically as possible. I wanted to see drag queens, guys in leather, rainbows, political signs, the Dykes on Bikes—everything you would see at Pride. I didn’t want any of it to be watered-down or sugarcoated. Lots of people have asked me, “Do you think that’s appropriate for children?” And my answer always is—YES.

It's beyond me how the nudity isn't just a 'neccesary evil' in their eyes, but something that is appropriate or part of the appeal to them - a positive good. Since your three year old is ready of sexual development, of course.

I believe the term for their view is "pansexualism." It generally includes the idea that children at the youngest ages are already sexual beings. But remember, ten years ago if one had said that this was what was coming, one would have been called a crazy bigot.

Post a comment

Note: In order to limit duplicate comments, please submit a comment only once. A comment may take a few minutes to appear beneath the article.

Although this site does not actively hold comments for moderation, some comments are automatically held by the blog system. For best results, limit the number of links (including links in your signature line to your own website) to under 3 per comment as all comments with a large number of links will be automatically held. If
your comment is held for any reason, please be patient and an author or administrator will approve it. Do not resubmit the same
comment as subsequent submissions of the same comment will be held as well.

Reverse the order of the digits in 31, then type the answer using letters instead of numbers, all lower case. (required):